Tipster profile image
Head of Content authorBadge
Last Updated:

3 min read

Goff ‘very confused’ of penalty on decisive two-point play vs Cowboys
google news logo Follow us
Add comment
"I don't know if I've had this feeling before where you feel like you won but you didn't.", he said

On a two-point attempt, trailing 20-19 against Cowboys, with 27 seconds remaining, the Lions executed a play-action pass targeting offensive tackle Taylor Decker. Decker discreetly slipped off the end of the line to the backside of the end zone, seemingly making a go-ahead catch. However, the referees penalized him for illegal touching, a crucial call that would ultimately contribute to Detroit’s defeat after two unsuccessful attempts and a failed onside kick.

Expressing his frustration, Jared Goff conveyed to reporters, as per the team transcript, “We get down there, get the touchdown and get the two-point conversion and yeah, it sucks. It’s unfortunate, man. I don’t know if I’ve had this feeling before where you feel like you won but you didn’t.”

Following the controversial call, head coach Dan Campbell and several Lions players were visibly upset with the officials’ decision.

Despite video evidence showing Decker approaching referee Brad Allen before the play, he was not considered to have reported as eligible, unlike his fellow lineman Dan Skipper, who took the position at tackle to Decker’s right.

Explaining the situation in a pool report with Dallas Morning News’ Calvin Watkins after the game, Allen said, “So, we had a situation where if you were going to have an ineligible number occupy an eligible position, you have to report that to the referee. On this particular play, number 70, who had reported during the game a couple of times, reported to me as eligible. Then he lined up at the tackle position. So, actually, he didn’t have to report at all. Number 68, who ended up going downfield and touching the pass, did not report. Therefore, he is an ineligible touching a pass that goes beyond the line, which makes it a foul. So, the issue is, number 70 did report, number 68 did not.”